Wouldn’t call them new or a discovery, both Gunnar Stenmark and other makers have been around for quite some time and the subject tend to come up on C&F every now and then. The whistle itself has been around for a few hundred years.
There use to be som good clips on tvfolk.net but I think you can find a few on U.tube if you search for spilåpipa, spelpipa or härjedalspipa.
So, to ask the question,
are any of these instruments suitable for ITM?
I notice there is a simple whistle in the mix,
how about that? Also what do these cost?
The key of A seems well represented, that’s
nice. I find A whistles quite useful.
No, the traditional ones are not suited for ITM as the tonality is different.
Stenmark and a few others also make 6-8 hole versions in major scales but they are whistles not Härjedalspipor/Spilåpipor.
Göran Månsson also has a MySpace page with 4 full-length tracks of composed tunes from his latest album Mon, with guitarist Roger Tallroth of Våsen. Really, really nice stuff, IMO.
Leif Eriksson is a maker of very fine swedish spilåpipas (spelpipa/spilåpipa). They don´t look that fancy and they aren´t very expensive but they have a lovely and delicate sound. I own one of his pipes in I treasure it very much. His version of the Spelpipa is based on an old instrument from Djura village in the Leksand region. The original is in the Stockholm Music Museum. The original is made of birch tree and has seven finger holes. I play it as a recorder. The transition shouldn´t be that difficult for a tin whistle player. It is tuned in a traditional minor key (dalamoll or svenskt vallåtsmodus). Leif Eriksson also makes swedish bagpipes and nyckelharpor (a fiddle with keyes!)
Well, even more technically… Norway was a part of Denmark (Swedens arch-enemy in those days) back in those days (1645) when Härjedalen became a swedish province by the treaty of Brömsebo. But, to the winner belongs the spoils… We are all good friends in scandinavia nowadays!
You’d have to look very hard to find anyone in Norway who would agree that Norway was any more part of Denmark when it was occupied by Denmark than it was part of Germany when it was occupied by that nation between 1940 and '45.
But anyway, Norway’s got loads of oil now, so maybe we’ll just buy Härjedalen back…
Well, I´m no historian, but you can hardly compare union of two countries for more than 400 years to a 5 year occupation! It´s like saying that Wales isn´t a part of the UK.
Never has been. Some border bits have been switched to and fro between the two nations through history, but Wales as a whole has always had a separate identity.
“Great Britain” is a geographical label that is tolerably neutral politically and can be applied to the whole of the mainland of Scotland, England and Wales without tending to raise much objection or cause offence. “United Kingdom” is a political/legal entity including England-and-Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is correct legally/constitutionally but politically obnoxious, at least in Wales and Scotland, to refer e.g in postal addresses to the UK, but many of us (and without necessarily being separatist, rather just anti-imperialist) even in England would prefer to be labelled by constituent nation and “GB” than by “UK”. (OK, I know there are many folks, mostly English or Unionists in Scotland and Ulster who prefer “UK”.) I’m English born, long term resident in Wales and think of myself as “British” with adoptive Welshness (I play Welsh trad music, support the Welsh rugby team, sent my children to Welsh language school, etc…) - but there are plenty who’d disagree with my doing so! Joyous, ain’t it?
To summarise, Wales is (and has been since the Anglo Saxon conquests of what became England) a nation in its own right, is technically a Principality of the United Kingdom and is geographically part of Great Britain, but has never in any way been part of England!!!
Edit: just to add that “UK” is NOT synonymous with “England” - see above.